64.1 Million Shades of Grey

Today I'm feeling quite political. Maybe it's all these Party Conferences that have been going off, or maybe its just my brain's method of detracting from tomorrow? There has been yet another article in the Daily Mail (for those who don't know it's a newspaper for middle class, wealthy, retired, male golfers - a.k.a. My father in law) about that famous national authority on IVF and Fertility, Kirsty Allsop...Hmm, yes, i was thinking the same. It's a bit like saying I'm a fashion and beauty icon beings as I own two frocks from Top Shop AND had my hair cut today (for the first time in two years.) Apparently, according to the DM, Miss Kirsty (as to further reaffirm how 'with it' they are by allowing an unmarried woman to have an opinion - how very forward thinking of them) women should stop irresponsibly relying on IVF, stop worrying about getting an education, not worry about their career, and just find any man with active sperm and pop a few kids out early. For anyone who knows her, or the Mail, you know this isn't the first time this has been brought up, it's just one of a long line of IVF/IF propaganda. Now, if you read the article again it's probably more likely that it's the way her comments are being presented that is wrong. I don't like her - she is a well known Tory supporter - but in her defence she is quoted as referring to the fact that often it's men who need to "grow up" and for once she doesn't place it all on the woman. I do not agree with her. BUT, I do agree that the population at large think like she is being presented as thinking. Gosh, it's all a bit double-speak, but bear with me, I'm getting to my point. The media constantly portray IVF as a "back up" for career women. They never show the 25 year old woman with ruined tubes due to endometriosis, or the 27 year old man with knackered sperm due to chemo, or the 35 year old couple who have been trying for 5 years since the day they were married. No one cares about that, it doesn't make a good political argument for the scrapping if IVF funding. They don't care that a woman is 40 and has been trying for years, being misadvised by her GP who doesn't actually understand fertility and ovulation and still refers to the "Tampax Guide to Periods" they were given at medical school. And you know what, so what if someone thought IVF WAS a good back up plan, and thinks that 40 is the new 30; that's the way the media have portrayed it for years. No one criticised Simon Cowell for being a dad for the first time in his 50s, but actress Tina Malone was tied to the stake by some sections of the media. Personally I don't think that a lot of the Infertility charities and campaigns help the general public understand the facts. All that gets mentioned is funding funding funding. Sadly, in the current economic climate there are cuts and the most vulnerable members of society are suffering, and that includes the infertile. When any anti-IVF mouthpiece talks it's always about how having children is a priviledge, how the NHS is at breaking point, how cancer treatment is more important. I don't think any infertile would disagree with the last comment, but I would argue that nearly evereything on the NHS is a lifestyle choice of some kind. Treatment for cataracts allow people to read or watch TV, which is a lifestyle choice. Hip replacements allow people to walk, which is a lifestyle choice. Treatment for addicition is a lifestyle choice...oh, but wait, addiction is often a result of mental illness - that's not a choice. Being unable to see, or walk, is isolating and can lead to mental illness and that's not a choice. Having a child, for a woman born with (or even without) a womb isn't a lifestyle choice, it's a natural part of why women are women. I'm being a bit facetious, and I certainly don't mean that women are only here to have children, because they aren't. However, no one can argue with the fact that we have a whole organ system, and brain chemicals, that are only there to procreate - it's as natural as breathing or eating, and not being able to have a child feels like you can't breath. I think it's about time we stopped focussing on funding and started focussing on what it means to not be able to have children, how it affects men and women, that age is not necessarily a factor, that physical debilitating illness goes hand-in-hand. In reality we all have one thing in common, we were all born. If our parents couldn't have children we wouldn't be here (though after reading half way though my rant, I doubt there are many people here right now) and that would be pretty crap. We should focus on the companies who make obscene amounts of money out of infertility, and that includes milking money from the NHS. We should focus on the emotional effects of having treatment, feeling the pressure of society, feeling the pressure of work. Have you read the Handmaids Tale by Margaret Atwood? I don't think we are far off. Women are expected to have a career, bake, find a husband, buy a house, grow organic carrots, save for a pension, get pregnant, breast feed, have cloth nappies, go back to work and do it all again. We aren't supposed to struggle to get pregnant, we aren't supposed to get upset when we can't, we are supposed to take responsibility for infertility, and then we are expected to find £21,000+ to pay for IVF. When we are having treatment we are expected to work. When it fails we are expected to work. Then we are just expected to adopt. I very much fear that Kirsty-Gate is just the start. There is an election next year and there probably won't be a coalition. There will be more cuts and who is going to complain when the cuts affect the people who "made a lifestyle choice," and those people who "left it too late." There are roughly 64.1 million people in this country. Nothing is black and white. We all have our own stories and our own circumstances and we are all on the spectrum of different shades of grey. I don't think I have achieved anything today other than to scare myself with how much I can ramble when I get stuck into a hot political potato!